tv The War Room Current February 14, 2013 3:00pm-4:00pm PST
(mariana) so he's explaining how they take the slime, they call it the milk here. oh you see, the white stuff coming out. this is the poison that they make the vaccine out of it. (darren) captain jack sparrow [speaking portuguese] this could be a new fashion accessory. it's a beautiful color. the scientific name of the kambô is phyllomedusa bicolor. in english, it's known as the "giant waxy monkey tree frog." it remains to be seen if the kambô will ever yield a marketable pharmaceutical. research and development is costly. and many starts prove false. but the kambô is just one
charismatic example of the potential that lies in the rainforest. and it could serve as a launching point for providing an economic incentive for preserving the amazon. >> michael: i'mi'm michael shure in "the war room." tonight republicans finally show some backbone. they stand as one in opposition to a war hero, and i thought the
grand 'ol party was in trouble. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> michael: the senate is still wrangling over chuck hagel's confirmation for defense secretary, but this morning harry reid does in the have the 60 votes to overcome a republican filibuster. he needs five republican votes but so far he only has two, mike johanns of nebraska and thad cochrane of mississippi. so he took his colleagues to task in his own soft-spoken way. >> it's tragic that they've decided to filibuster this qualified nominee. it is really unfortunate. >> michael: you know, reid is of course not totally off the hook. he didn't push filibuster reform through earlier this year even though it looked like he had the chance to do so.
but the ludicrous part of this whole thing is the reason why republicans are giving for opposing hagel is bengahzi. that this was a cover up after the ambassador was killed. they're alleging that chuck hagel was involved. not only is that a stretch but chuck hagel oversee something like this. they dignified the response. after both lindsey graham and john mccain said they were largely satisfied according to the hill, but they still wanted to push the hagueel vote back. in reality it's not like they actually care about any of that. this is purely about political grandstanding. and speaking of that john boehner is using the senate to excuse his complete lack of action in the house.
>> the president likes to attack congress but if he's serious about enacting his agenda, i think it must start with the part of this congress, the united states senate. why can't he get past in the united states senate? >> michael: that's a really good question mr. speaker. let's get to work, senate democrats. joining me now philip ewing. he comes to us from washington, d.c. philip, welcome inside "the war room"." >> thanks for having me. >> michael: let's just start at the basics about hagel. once the senate gets closure what will be next for chuck hagel? >> the way it will probably work is that republicans want to vote on thursday to end debate on hagel. it doesn't look like democrats have the votes to stop their barricade, and so what will probably happen the senate will take a break for the president's recess and then come back and vote again. although it isn't clear how that
exactly is going it play out. what republicans mostly want is more time. they say the full senate needs more time to consider hagel's nomination because he's so controversial, his views are so out of the mainstream. what i think they really want is more time to try to embarrass him, attack the white house and make as much hay out of this as they possibly can. >> michael: do people really understand the hay that is being made out of this? when they ask for more time, so many of us roll our eyes. they had time and their minds are made up. except for susan collins who said she was supporting hagel, and now she's not supporting hagel. is the purpose to embarrass hagel or the white house. >> the purpose is to embarrass the white house. they showedded that they could derail nominees that the president wanted for his cab nat post. they wanted to send the u.n.
ambassador for secretary of state. she ultimately withdrew her name because of the connection with the fallout from the bengahzi attacks. as long as the republicans feel they can force the extra time to concede is to demands for information and other things they're probably going to do that. they have no intent to cooperate with the president, and they have every intent to block him especially those republican senators who are worried about primary challenges in 2014 and their conservative states. >> michael: so as usual it goes to politics. i'm baffled by the fact that john kerry, as we mentioned earlier faced no questioning at all about this, and it was his position, secretary of state, it was the state department. that's why susan rice was not nominated people believe because it was about the state department. now chuck hagel is getting the heat for this bengahzi or holding up his nomination because of that. there seems to be conflicting information about lindsey graham and john mccain and how
satisfied they are with the white house response on bengahzi, what they plan on doing. how do you think that will governor how they vote? >> well, the white house on thursday sent a letter to senate lawmakers saying the president was fully engaged on bengahzi. he was directing the secretary of state at the time hillary clinton to appeal for help for the libyan government that obama himself called the next day to ask for help with the investigation and the rest of it. graham is up for re-election in 2014, and he has been successful pressing the bengahzi story for as much as possible. again that's what his interest and concern is. he wants to go back to home state voters and say i stuck it to the president on this. i consider it to be as bad as watergate, and so he has no incentive whatsoever to stop doing that until the very last minute. that hasn't approached yet. >> michael: now, it's worth pointing out not only is graham
up for re-election but it looks like he's going to get a primary as well. to see as right of the president as he possibly can seems like a good path for him to take. let's go to the president. what does this bode for the president's second term if he has this much trouble getting his nominees past of the democratic senate. >> it's funny you ask this. this all is playing out the same week that the president gave his state of the union dress to which he laid out a very ambitious liberal laundry list of things he wants to accomplish. as this procedure on the hagueel nominee shows congress is going to fight him tooth and claw on everything they possibly can. it means the white house really has to lower its ambitions to what it can get accomplished at least for the next two years. i think democrats hope they can get control of the house after 2014. i'm not sure how good their chances are of doing that, but at least that's their ambition. for the meantime they have to pick their battles about what
they can actually get through this very difficult republican resistence in congress. >> michael: politico's philip ewing, thank you for great stuff. we'll shift from the washington politics to the global issues that hagel would oversee if he's confirmed. with me from the brookings institute, michael we welcome you back inside "the war room." i want to ask you you know, republicans are asking reid to hold on hagel's vote, that they would more likely be on board next week. what would it mean if leon panetta had to go to that meeting instead of chuck hagel? >> well, you know, i think the big issues here have to do not so much with the nato meeting because with all due respect to n.a.t.o. it's a great organization, i don't know of any huge n.a.t.o. decisions that are up coming in the next few
weeks. but the sequestration looms and you well know, and the iran management looms. we have to make decisions on afghanistan. but the president just made most of those for the time being. again, i think it's sequestration and iran probably that demands hagel get up to speed quickly. that's where i would want him confirmed to engage on those debates as soon as possible. >> michael: i would suspect there would be republican glee in embarrassing the president having to send in sitting but lame duck secretary to nato. so i feel like that's part of what they want tad. to do. >> very quickly. you're right. any particular incident like that may factor in at a detailed level. but the fundamental question
here the fundamental issue is that republicans don't really like chuck hagel very well. they don't agree with most of his position. they has feel a little bit of a sense of betrayal by someone who is a republican, who is supposed to be on their side. as you and i both know the parties have the hardest time for someone when has been of their ilk and then goes and deviates. i think it's much deeper than the tactic of a n.a.t.o. summit. they would like to stop hagel if they can and they'll keep trying until they run out of ideas. >> michael: there is a little bit of joe lieberman going on for him as well. what is the focus on bengahzi. is this also republican grandstanding? the reason why i ask this, they didn't ask john kerry about this at all. why do you think that is? >> well, i have a bengahzi issue the way it's played. i'm a big fan of senator graham
and senator mccain but i don't totally understand the obsession with bengahzi. i don't think it's proportionate to the mistakes that were made. this were mistakes made. it was not the administration's finest hour. but it's also not on par with watergate. it's not some deliberate coverup. frankly in strategic terms and while it is a tragedy and we're upset about that, but it does not set back american interests very much because libya is an american side show compared to what is going on in syria egypt, and so forth. i wish they would get back to that debate and not bengahzi. >> michael: my frustration is that they're going after hagel when it was not a defense department issue. and they gave john kerry that would not be many republican's first choice in the administration, they gave him a free pass there. let's go to the president a
little bit more. he announced in the state of the union that he would be bringing home half of the remaining troops in 2014. what would that men mean for afghan security. >> the president did mention that we were not going to draw down very much for the next eight months. the president wanted to tell a war-weary nation that we're getting out gradually. but the reason why he needed the 12-month time horizon for the 50% cut is because we're not going to be doing much cutting at all during the spring and summer fighting season, the afghans still need our help. i see this as the president's previous decisions as being fair fairly resolute. and more of a win in the sense for the military if you will, than for let's say, vice president biden who was probably in favor of a more rapid
draw-down. it's generally consistent where the president has been and with the campaign plan as it's been as well. >> michael: you know, it seems to me that they're constantly drawing troops out of afghanistan. afghanistan has been about to end and all the troops are about to come home,, and every state of the union, we're going to get out of afghanistan. it made total sense the way you described it, the eight-month drew down and a departure of biden. let's go over to korea, they're conducting nuclear tests, what can the u.s. do in that space that hasn't already been done, and is this an opportunity for us to to engage china? >> well, it's a tough opportunity. north korea i think we have to keep a couple of things in mind. we obviously need to respond in some way. they can't be allowed to get away with this. they didn't kill anybody but nuclear tests are not acceptable
in the modern world. the idea that i'm trying to think there is whether any additional sanctions that we try to impose on them should be temporary on the condition that they not test again. the idea being that you would like kim jung-un this new 30-year-old leader to get a chance to establish himself. maybe he needed to allow the nuclear test to please the hard linessers. maybe he felt inexperienced to quickly take on the hard liners. i'm not necessarily saying that he's a reformer but we want to allow that possibility down the road. a punishment that is firm but temporary may be the way to break out of this logjam, and china may go along with that more readily than slapping on sanctions in duration. but anything is going to be a long shot with north korea at this point. >> michael: we're all optimists when we hear of a 30-year-old
leaderrer coming in and he's going to be a reformer and progressive. michael o'hanlon, thank you very much for making us smarter. michael o'hanlon of the brookings institute. coming up, north korea, iran, and some kid in his basement with a laptop, yes threats come in all shapes and sizes these days. we'll tell you with the kid with the laptop might be the scariest. plus the president has taken to frame his climate change message in economic terms but some wonder when he'll get in the action. and later valentine's day only comes once a year. unfortunately violence against women occurs every minute of every day. what one group is using today to do just that. we'll be right back.
i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. >> the cyber i think represents as big a threat to this country. it's an insidious quiet kind of a threat that we've never quite seen before.
it's an area that i will put high priority on if i'm confirmed to be secretary of defense. >> michael: back live at the chuck hagel show. that was senator chuck hagel on the need for cyber security defense planning. while there have been cut backs in several areas it's only gun ramping up in cyber security. the pentagon will increase the staff on cyber command from 900 to 5,000 employees for the next few years. it calls for reorganizing the d.o.d.'s command to a semis kateed cyber fighting machine. it will be divided into three areas: national mission forces to protect our nation's electric grid from outside attack. combat mission forces, and cyber protection forces to fortify the pentagon's computer networks. it's a brave new virtual world and some experts say america's
already late to the game when it comes to fighting cyber wars. with me from washington, d.c. to talk about what is needed to boost cyber security in the pentagon is allen paul, director of research at the sans institute. he's co-chair of the secretary of homeland securities task force on cyber skills. welcome to the war room, allen. >> thank you michael. >> michael: you know, president obama announced what are saying are long awaited cyber security executive order in the state of the union address. let's listen to the president talk about what he has to say on the other side. >> earlier today i signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing and developing standards is to protect our national security, our jobs, and our privacy. [applause] >> michael: so allen what does that establish? and in specifics what did the president layout for us? >> those two things have completely different impacts. the sharing of information is
valuable but it's not critical in that most organizations don't know what to do with the data when they get the shared data. but the standards are everything, and will actually know probably in about ten days whether the executive order will make any difference at all. >> michael: really, that quickly we're going to know? >> yes, there is a fight on. you heard the fight in all of the articles between a group of people who are terribly antagonistic to any federal regulation who wanted the president not to issue the executive order. it took a lot of spine to go ahead and do it. but what their new plan is to try to push the standards setting and to take three to five years to think about it when, in fact, right now we know what needs to be done. we know how to do it, and so within a ten days you'll find out whether the white house michael daniel, the cyber
adviser, is going to act now or put it all off for another two or three years while they go through their manipulations. >> michael: so let's talk about that a little bit. last year secretary of defense leon panetta warned that future cyber security attacks could be as destructive as 9/11. let's talk about the threat. what would such an attack look like? people can't relate to the attacks because we can't relate to the people behind them, and what are the biggest concerns there? >> i'll answer that and throw it back together with the decision i was talking about before. >> michael: yes. >> you heard about the attack that destroyed the centerfuges in iran. iran is fighting back. they're angry. they're running--they destroyed 30,000 computers and so much so that you couldn't do online banking at several of the banks for weeks. they're fighting back.
they're angry. the most dangerous action that someone could take against the united states in this area other than military action turning our military weapons in the wrong direction is taking out power systems. and it turns out the attack on the iranian centerfuge is exactly the attack that would be needed to take out a power system. the same control systems run the centerfuges as the power systems. built by the same manufacturers and built the same way. it's connected to the internet, but iranian centerfuges weren't. they work in by breaking into the pcs that all of us known. that's what we know how to stop. we can stop 95% of all of these attacks, and by stopping 95% of them we make the very advance attackers visible is we can do things to them to stop them as
well. >> michael: you know, i cannot help but like an it to the war on terror in a way. we have these problems, we don't know where they are. they're elusive mysterious. who are they that we're following now. >> there are three groups. a lot of in eastern europe that still money from banks non-profits, churches. it's a massive financial theft campaign. there are the nation states that are using this mostly for espionage. and then the terrorist groups and the anonymous they're using it just to do damage. all three groups are there. because there are so many when you add all those people up, and the pla has a massive program to recruit and train these people, both in the civilian force and in the military force and so do other countries, when you add them all up you can't find them
and take them out. you have to build defenses, which is why the president's executive order is so important. if he doesn't act now on the things that matter, then we're two or three years down the road and our power systems are penetrated and everything else is as well. >> michael: when we listen to you tell us about all these people it makes me wonder do we have enough cyber security officials to keep up demand? >> that was the big problem with the cyber commands announcement. i know the military leaders who are supposed to supply those extra 4,000 people. they don't have them. the united states has not had a program that develops cyber security high-tech people. it has had a program that develops frequent flyers. people who can talk about cyber security, but the real pros who can fight back and defend the banks and the systems it has a new program the task force that
i did with the secretary the secretary of homeland security was the initiation of it. it's bean run by the same people who used to run the first robotics competition. it's a national skills competition where people might have been doing some hacking can try out. they can prove that they got the skills. if they do, they get a full ride scholarshipscholarship in a program that is modeled after the air force system. new york city is looking at it. new jersey has just kicked it off. we look and we think governors across the country will be operating it in a year. but we have never had a program that develops the high tech talent until now. >> michael: we're clearly moving toward an era way past spyware and spam blocking. alan pallor. thank you for sharing with us all that you know about this real threat. does the push towards
i want we have big change on the climate change front. many were arrested at a keystone pipeline protest outside of the white house. and today bernie sanders and barbara boxer rolled out a big piece of climate change legislation with many of those activists standing behind them. their bill would do many good things. the great part about that, three firth of that money raised would
go back to the american people. the rest would be invested in clean energy and renew bees. the bill would close the halliburton loophole so drinking water would be safe from fracking fluid. getting it through congress is quite another game. >> if congress won't act soon to protect future generations i will. i will direct my cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take now and in the future to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy. >> michael: it turns out that the president's forceful pitch is exactly what the american public wants. a poll out this week finds that two thirds of voters support the president taking significant
steps to address climate change. 93% believe americans have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted or damaged. seems like you have the people on your side, mr. president. now it's time to take action. joining me now from right next to me is james west editor of the climate desk. james, so glad to have you here. i want to ask you right off the bat, were you encouraged in what you heard. >> not especially. in the climate change field we do this thing count climate counting and we count how many times climate change is said and hold on on to dear life. >> michael: the counters have been busier now than they have been in a while. the president did say it in the inauguration and state of the
union dress, it's all new. >> this is a new frame for this topic. they've been very good to setting this up as an issue to tackle over the years. but as he said this will be serious limitations. he'll have to do a lot of executive work to get around the hostile congress to this idea. >> michael: let's talk about today's bill. this is a climate carbon tax in it. that is financial incentive. voters can say if we support people who support climate change legislation we get a little money in our pockets. is that the key to getting the climate change legislation passed? >> i think with any of these things, things that go back to families this was a pitch to the middle class the other night, and this is building on that rewarding people to ensent adviseincentivize this, and i don't think anybody will think this pass. the white house doesn't want the carbon tax. jay carney has come out and said
that. this is a shot in the dark if you can't get democrats on the side from oil and gas producing states. the carbon tax may be not but one that could trade into a carbon trading scheme may work. >> michael: something that the white house would be on board with. >> he said a market-based solution. if one doesn't happen, then executive order. >> cenk: one thing about these speeches, everyone who is in--he was speaking to you about climate change and you're looking at every word he's seeing, are you keying in on, market there we have something. >> it's saying this is what we want. i'm saying the word "market." i hope the policies makers are listening to me now and make they can pick up the slack here. >> michael: tell me what else from his speech that you heard is encouraging on climate incident. >> doubling of efficiency by
by 2050. >> michael: 2030 2030. >> i apologize. the u.s. lags behind germany japan, and others, a place like new york city may be able to reduce it's carbon footprint by 90% by 2050. i got the year right on that. >> michael: president obama will be sitting on a beach in hawai'i in 2030 and hopefully in 2050. when you hear presidents say these sorts of things it seems so far ahead. but is that in your community now we have time to work on this. now we have the support to work on it? >> i'm interesting in covering this stuff at the start as well as the middle and the end. i'm going to be here longer than president obama, and i care about that time. i think the conversation is starting and it feels like we're at 2007 not 2013. there was a huge failure in copenhagen to get a global
accord. that set america back several years. we're starting now to have the type of conversations that countries had in the late 2000. australia, my home country passed a comprehensive carbon package that seems to be slowly welcomed by the public. but the start is just as important as the end. as long as we start the conversation. as a journalist i've got a job to do. >> michael: that's important. tell me one more dog whistle. we didn't hear the word "keystone" the other night. what is the role of keystone? is it a bargaining chip or the president may not even support the keystone pipeline. >> i don't know. this is going to be an interesting year with the new secretary of state who will be ultimately the one who signs off on this. this is going beyond state- state-foreign borders. so john kerry's role is going to be interesting. obama, there is very little
evidence to suggest that he's not going to really want this thing to happen. he kicked it out of the campaign committee essentially to deal with in his second term. now i feel like he's going to do what he wants to do with it, we just got to watch the smoke signals. >> michael: we just have to see what that is. james west, it's a pleasure to sit across from your passion. thank you for coming to "the war room." coming up, a global march to draw attention to a global problem. take together streets. we'll talk about that and more with kelly goff of the root. we'll be right back. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. (vo) she's joy behar. >>current will let me say anything. [ male announcer ] start with a groundbreaking car. good. then invent an entirely new way to buy one. no. no. no. yes!
a website that works like a wedding registry. but for a car. first, you customize it. then let people sponsor the car's parts as gifts. dad sponsors the engine for your birthday. grandma sponsors the rims for graduation. the car gets funded. then you pick up your new dodge dart at the dealership. and all that's left to do is say thanks. easy. ♪ ♪ when she's sad she writes about goblins. [ balloon pops goblin growling ] she wrote a lot about goblins after getting burned in the market. but she found someone to talk to and gained the confidence to start investing again. ♪ ♪ and that's what you call a storybook ending. it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.
that's why women and men all over the world took to the streets today from new york to new delhi london to kartomb. they interrupted their day to demand an end to violence. those were protesters chanting we are part of the 1 billion and rising in kabul afghanistan just today. the movement is called 1 billion and rising. the founder is none other than play wright eve the woman lined the vagina monologue. they saided to go big. joining me now to discuss this global initiative and other news of the day is kelly goff, the political correspondent comes to us from new york city. welcome inside the "the war room," kelly. >> it's great to be back. >> michael: i want to talk about these marchs, but in this country it all comes under the
guise of the violence against women act. the senate voted to reauthorize the violence against women act now it goes back to the house where it was blocked just last year. do you think what is happening today, the movements like this will help the backwoods g.o.p. come to their senses? >> well, it should. i don't know that i'm hopeful that it will, but it should. let me tell i couldn't. not only are women doing this in 230 contributes. but let's talk about where they're doing it. the congo pakistan blaze where is i dare say we here in america think we're quote more enlightened. we're supposed to have more opportunities at hurry finger tips but women in those countries are walking out and saying enough. but here in this country we're allowing men to not pass an act that had make us safer.
in congo and pakistan they're standing up for something we can't even get passed here in this country. it's infuriating. shame is a powerful motivator for a lot of things and sometimes for legislation. i have my fingers crossed that we'll have be shamed in passing this in this country. >> michael: you have congress in congress who believes the world ends at the atlantic ocean border and the pacific ocean border and they don't see what is going on and this doesn't matter what is happening in congo. i'll share your optimism that eventually it will sink in. we're talking about guns so much in this country right now. obviously we know the relationship between guns and domestic violence, and how much more likely a woman is to be a victim. i think it's 270% more likely to to be a victim of violent crime if there is a gun in the house.
listen to what they have to say in the new stand and fight campaign. >> so they want to ban high capacity magazines. the madmen drug cartels and home invading killers will still get them from the same black market that sales drugs stolen cars and everything else that criminals buy. >> michael: they need a new argument, don't they, keli? >> i think they need a new spokesperson new argument, new team, new philosophy, a new a lot of things. what is interesting is the nra has actually been the president and supporter of gun control's best weapon to get more gun control passed because of wacky ads like this. i know a lot of people who are moderate gun owners are people who believe in gun rights who say i don't want to be associated with that. the more they keep talking there are a lot of people who support gun control who are hopeful that the nra is going to keep pumping out ads like these.
it's the number one billion rising it wants to remind people just like the stats you said. a woman is more than 300 times more likely to be murder first degree there is a gun in the house. look, they are not making effective cases is my point. >> michael: listen from south africa we heard the terrible story about a man and his girlfriend, there was a gun in the house. the idea-- >> yep. >> michael: rock stars wouldn't need all the security if there wasn't so many guns on the street. i'm not saying that it would solve the problem entiretily but that argument is clear. let's shift to politics. a senator has announced he's not running for re-election. lottenberg said while i may not be seeking re-election there is plenty of work to do before the end of this term and i'll going
to keep fighting as hard as ever for the people of new jersey and the united states senate. what led to this decision, his age? the inevitability of cory booker. >> i was going to say he has cory booker nipping at his heals and people look at cory booker as a rising star. they won't let that be stopped because they consider him to be the future of the party. that was inevitable. but i want to give credit where credit is due. senator lautenberg is one of the heroes in the initiative. he fought in the 90s to ensure those convicted of misdemeanor assaults also could not get guns, which was a big step. it used to be just felonies. we often know that domestic violence often escalates from a small incident to a larger one then to death. he pushed for that gun control. he'll an real loss in terms of the gun control movement.
i want to pay respect to that. >> michael: it's so important to remember that. i'm glad you pointed it out. lastly and quickly we heard from the president the other night we know his priorities. you just wrote a column about the first lady's agenda. what do you hope she does? >> i hope she gets to enjoy a little bit of freedom now she's in the second term. she's been a terrific first lady. no one disputes the quality of the first lady including those who are republicans. but the reality is we saw her embody the laura bush mold of first lady in the first term. likable, accessible, organic gardening, but this is a harvard-educated lawyer. i would like to see her step up and embrace things like the family planning fight. not necessarily abortion, but talking about the importance of access to contraception, and help to go really talk about the importance of having more women in elected office. everyone is expecting hillary clinton to become our first
female president. michelle obama can nurture girls to aspire to be the second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth female president. i would like to see her end her voice to causes like that. >> michael: that's exciting stuff. >> and make project runway. heidi klum said she would love to have her as a guest on project runway. >> michael: that's to get the show extended to 2016. that's a total ploy. the amazing keli, thank you for joining us on "the war room." >> i love that. thank you. >> michael: we're not talking about mark row rubio marco rubio's water shed moment. apparently neither is he. we'll get to that right after the break. honest. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.
the chill of peppermint. the rich dark chocolate. york peppermint pattie get the sensation. [ piano plays ] troy polamalu's going deeper. ♪ ♪ and so is head & shoulders deep clean. [ male announcer ] with 7 benefits it goes deep to remove grease, gunk and flakes. deep. like me. [ male announcer ] head & shoulders deep clean for men. ♪ ♪
>> michael: let's check in with the "the young turks." cenk, what have you got tonight? >> cenk: we've got an awesome show for you tonight. so bill nye the science guy he's going to tell us about an astro that will take out the whole earth. >> michael: wow. >> cenk: we have it find out. >> michael: i'm obviously--it's thursday and i'm institute ing something new the best. chuck hagel, confirmed or not confirmed. >> cenk: i'm going confirmed. >> michael: we have to think of another bet. i'm not going you $5 that we have rocky anderson who ran for tonight, and a conservative guest on fracking, the sierra club guest. that will be a lot of fun. >> michael: cenk uygur and "the young turks" coming up right after "the war room." to what we like to call the best
of the rest, the political news and nuggets that you need to know. it may not be if hillary clinton will be running but if nate silver will be forecasting. according to the student newspaper at washington university in st. louis, silver told an audience there quote if it gets really weird in 2014 in 2016 then maybe i'll stop doing it. i don't want to influence the democratic process in a negative way. no, nate, don't go! maybe you just need to be more accurate with your predictions about how influential you are. and about the super bowl by the way. moving now to illinois, the state senate is playing cupid. senators approved a bill allowing same-sex marriage. they called it a vote for the history book. the bill now moves to the democratic house where democrats enjoy a 71-47 advantage over
republicans. democratic governor pat quinn indicated he would sign the bill if it reaches his desk. currently nine states allow same-sexsame-sex couples to marry. members of the historic panel that overseas the museum that honors abraham lincoln the "chicago sun times" report the panel members doubt the chain of custody of the hat. it was allegedly a gift from a farmer in the 1850s. i don't know why anyone would want to keep a dirty old hat if it didn't belong to lincoln but that's just me. also i'm not a historian but why don't they get daniel day-lewis to try it on and settle it once and for you will. we'll be back.
>> michael: it's valentine's day and boy does brett erlich have something special planned for folks on the capitol hill. i hope he does because that's what we assigned him in the meeting. everyone please calm down, it's only brett talking. >> today is valentine's day. the holiday that pays tribute to the ancient greek god. i'm giving valentine's to my favorite political figure, and in true spirit of the holiday i forgot to plan, and i'm